Patent Case Watch

Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Mojo Mobility Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al, No. 2:22-cv-00398 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2024)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
Summary Judgment
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:22-cv-00398, Dkt. No. 291
Decided
September 5, 2024
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 223 Report and Recommendations (Motion(s)92 terminated)
Length
1 page
Download Opinion (PDF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

MOJO MOBILITY INC., §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. §

§ Case No. 2:22-cv-00398-JRG-RSP SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. § and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS § AMERICA, INC., §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER .

Plaintiff Mojo Mobility Inc. previously filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 92.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 223), recommending denial of the motion. Because no objections have been filed, and for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, the Recommendation is ADOPTED. It is therefore ORDERED that the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 92) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 5th day of September, 2024.

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Mojo Mobility Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al, No. 2:22-cv-00398 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2024).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_22-cv-00398-14
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_22-cv-00398-14

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 25, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case